It won't come as a surprise to long time readers to hear I have enough liquidity to fund a typical mortgage. Not poor but not rich either. So, what about "funding" a typical mortgage? 6.5% and 20% down? Sorry. I cannot honestly allocate my childrens' money in such a speculative venture. There's all this talk about affordability but the truth is ROI rules the equation. An extra 2% isn't gong to cut it in this environment.
Friday, February 09, 2007
What Would Robert Do?
It won't come as a surprise to long time readers to hear I have enough liquidity to fund a typical mortgage. Not poor but not rich either. So, what about "funding" a typical mortgage? 6.5% and 20% down? Sorry. I cannot honestly allocate my childrens' money in such a speculative venture. There's all this talk about affordability but the truth is ROI rules the equation. An extra 2% isn't gong to cut it in this environment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
79 comments:
Now I'm not claiming this is true, but IF it was, would Casey do it?
"Hey Casey,
I will GIVE you the money to pay CashCall in full if you go back and return ALL of the moderated comments to your blog, as well as stop removing/censoring links that “impugn” whatever exists of your alleged integrity.
For real. No banks. No tricks. No broken kneecaps. It’s your call. "
Sounds like a SWEET DEAL!
If he didn't it would be his stupidest move yet. He'd feel the sting at the back of his neck though. Or not.
Christ, he doesn't think that with a monthly burden in the tens of thousands of dollars, that it's necessary to sacrifice and get a job...
...do you think he'd have enough sense to take a deal like that?
I'm not so sure he would.
His pride and complacency would most likely win.
He's shown no evidence of common sense.
Dear RobDawg,
I don't mean to sound stupid, but I can't quite follow your train of thought in the heading for this thread. I even crossed the picket line and checked out IAFF to see if you were referring to something there.
Oh hell, maybe I just am stupid.
Northern Renter
@ Rob Dawg
Sorry if this was covered already - but are you renting now? For some reason based on your blog I thought you owned.
Maybe Casey should charge people daily fee to 'guest moderate' his blog.
"Sorry if this was covered already - but are you renting now? For some reason based on your blog I thought you owned."
Yes, he commented that he bought his Camarillo price for something like 1/7th of the wishing price of a nearby, similar house.
I took his "fund a mortgage" comment to about the state of mortgages today, that is, why he would not choose to underwrite a mortgage for a borrower. (Writing mortgages was once a respectable way for those with some extra cash to get a reasonable, and secure, return on their cash.)
--Tim, who also has no interest in funding mortgages
nothern renter,I can't quite follow your train of thought in the
heading for this thread.
Okay, fair enough. Play on words with a logical extension. What would Jesus do? What would Casey do? What would Robert do? Casey would borrow and borrow and borrow until stopped. I have set myself up as the anti-Casey and in that mode in these current conditions I'd not even be willing to lend for the most conservative MBS known, the traditional 80% LTV fixed 30.
B Sumner asked,
are you renting now? For some reason based on your blog I thought you owned.
I'm an owner. Bought a slightly less than an acre view lot with an older 2400sf rambling California ranch in 1995 for $220,000. Put a one in front of that today. Don't be envious, zillow says I've lost $10,000 per week every week since October '06. Last year I divested of all my non personal use properties. At the top. How do I know? The realtor I sold my last rental to said so a few months ago.
Tim from MB is correct [again] in everything he says.
Rob Dawg,
Image up top is also giving a 403 Forbidden. A lot of servers forbid remote hotlinking of their images--doesn't necessarily mean the image is copyrighted.
I just purchased a home. I am very liquid even with debt carried from a business I started.
Funny, I made mistakes as a kid (nothing NEAR where Casey is at) but I never did anything illegal or fraudulent. My problems with Casey basically are his fascination with borrowing from peter to pay paul and his ill-conceived ideas for "running a business."
He acts more like a shopaholic than somebody who is an investor. I admire you, Rob. Maybe in another 10 years (if the economy doesn't tank like people are predicting) I may be very liquid to the point of not having a thing to worry about (not that I have many worries, life is good).
Casey on the other hand is a kid who thought he'd go from Start to Finish without passing Go a few times. He is easily blinded by the wealth of others so it drives him to be compulsive and do whatever it takes for fame and wealth.
Argh, it chaps my hide. Even with my missteps with money early on, I always learned and avoid making the same mistakes. What's even sadder is that he doesn't want to work or do what EVERY SUCCESSFUL human being has done throughout time...work hard. When I lost a job, I was on the phone and hitting the pavement finding work, even if it meant making next to nothing. When a client is unhappy, I work overtime at no extra charge to fix it. When employed by somebody I will work 60-80 hours/week to do the job and make that person money.
I dunno...Casey is a "buzzkill" (as the kids may say). He just sucks the enthusiasm out of things with his phony demeanor.
"Image up top is also giving a 403 Forbidden. A lot of servers forbid remote hotlinking of their images--doesn't necessarily mean the image is copyrighted. "
No, but it doesn't necessarily mean you should be stealing the bandwidth either.
And while I'm on the subject, common courtesy dictates that you ask if the image is rights-protected BEFORE you use it.
Rob
My text wasn't particularly clear either; by heading, I meant the little para at the beginning and not the title of the thread. Tim from MBA cleared things up for me; I wasn't comprehending how you could compare the returns from buying a house under mortgage vs investing it. As Tim pointed out, you were not considering getting a house for yourself but would be effectively renting the money to someone else for a mortgage.
And please don't start a "What would Casey do" meme; I think he's the George Costanza of the home buying field (the episodes where he does the opposite of what he feels he should do).
Northern Renter
"No, but it doesn't necessarily mean you should be stealing the bandwidth either."
Actually, unless the image has been put into public domain by the copyright holder it is still protected by copyright.
And hot linking to images on other people's website is really bad form. The other website is paying for the nadwidth to host that image not you.
And hot linking to images on other people's website is really bad form. The other website is paying for the nadwidth to host that image not you.
Honest Rob doesn't mind. This whole site is ripped off content from Casey. A blog about a blog. Dolph's site is even worse...
"paying for the nadwidth"
I didn't know nadwidth was a technical term? Maybe if they measured Legion's nads it wouldn't cost too much. I'm guessing his nads are very small...
okay ..casey I know you read this site..so just this once I am going to give you an edumacation in leverage and the propert use of it.
If you cant figure it out and you have to ask questions..your an idiot go OD on fred flinstone vitamins right now.
Sales price of a home
120k
Down payment
20k
Cash Yield
20k (thats your down payment einstein)
ROI 20% on price 100% on down payment equity.(thats a dollar for dollar immediate return on your DP)
Lets break it down for you casey in return analysis
If you pay all cash this is what is works out to
100k purchase
debt 0
assume simple interest for 2 years at 7% ====you guessed it zero
net sales price 130k
total cash invested 100k
gross profit 30k
net profit (yes same as gross)
ROI on cash invested 30%
Annual rate of return 15%
now lets break it down when you apply leverage correctly (take notes ..this is where you failed on your property)
Purchase 20k
debt 80k
Simple interest for 2years @7%=11,200
Net sale price 130k
Total cash invested 31,200
Gross profit 30k (omg is that the same--NO)
Here comes the kicker casey
Net profit 18,800
ROI of cash invested 60%
annual rate of return 30%
OMG its that easy casey..now lets get into the time value of money theory.
It is a basic universal law that at its core states that money is worth it's most Right now.
well you dont have any money right now..so your debt is worth more in worth less in the future than it is now...WRONG
It is worth more, they add penalties, interest...shit that offsets inflation..and the time value of money worth in the black ..not in the red.
See the money you owe now ....well its worth more now..in the future it will be worth less..that means in the future with the money you make..it will be worth more then than it is now.....your paying with money that is worth more to things that are worth less...you follow me here.
Now do you take the bigger profit now and go for it...yes you did.
OOOOOOPS...you forgot the tax man..and he cometh every time
What are the incentives to use leverage long term and get money later to help offset the principle that money is worth more now.
Well exemption of the sale of a home 250k single 500k married filing jointly.
and OMG...the tax man has taken care of flippers too...you buy and sold in less than two years...no exemption and capital gains...EEK..highest tax bracket imaginable. (this is the part where I point and laugh at you and call you a moron)
why do you think the flippers on flip dat house (or in nova douche university--flip that mercedes) go for high ROI...we are talking 40k-300k and higher.
because for them to do it....they have overhead....they are going to pay a huge amount on that gain.
and after they pay their salaries, office expenses, etc etc etc etc...they might have 10k for themselves out of that 40k they just made.
See their time is worth that....spend 2 months on this deal with x amount of hours per month..My formula dictates I need a deal to make this much money...lets go find one that meets my criteria.
I want you to go to prison casey...NOW.
Hey Anon:
1) I don't LINK the majority of my images. I upload them to blogger.
So basically, I am either unintentionally HELPING Casey with click throughs (which I try not to do) or I am using Blogger's bandwidth. Don't like it? Complain to Blogger but I hope you have a kick butt lawyer because:
2) I have a FAIR USE right to use images from PUBLIC PEOPLE. You upload it to a public place and make an ass out of yourself by justifying what a crook you are and WE have the right to comment on it.
Guess what? It's no longer "fair use" if it's NOT a publicly available photo. Don't tell me I am ripping off poor wittle Casey's content. He's the one who thinks it's okay to rip off banks, creditors and friends.
But to recap... If you become a PUBLIC PERSON (i.e. - YOU (Casey) like to have your face plastered on newspapers and websites) we have the right to blog about it in a commentary/newsitem way. I cannot go and snap photos of you in your backyard or in your house, but I can use publicly posted photos and can also use any photos of you snapped in a PUBLIC venue. So basically, too bad.
Sorry, it's the way of the world. Don't like it? Please, contact Blogger and pull my site down and guess what? 10 more sites will pop up using Casey material. And on top of that, other blogs will only make you look like the villain here cuz I'm just reporting it as I see it.
BTW - I wouldn't have to cut and paste Casey's quotes so much if he/you didn't revise them so much.
Guess what...you want fame and attention, you got it. Nobody is ripping off your content if it's a commentary or editorial. LOL, you are dense aren't you?
© 2006 I am Facing Foreclosure .com. All Rights Reserved.
If you take a quote, print the source and link back you're fine. If you copy an entire page, don't link back and then add very little value in your commentary, you're violating copyright and you're stealing.
Besides Dolph, nobody but the twelve people that visit your site give two shits about your blog about a blog. How original!
© 2006 I am Facing Foreclosure .com. All Rights Reserved.
If you take a quote, print the source and link back you're fine. If you copy an entire page, don't link back and then add very little value in your commentary, you're violating copyright and you're stealing.
Besides Dolph, nobody but the twelve people that visit your site give two shits about your blog about a blog. How original!
ROFL..what the fuck is casey going to do anyway if someone copys his page.
Send them a very threatening letter on a recycled bill that he doesnt pay because he cant afford paper?
Fucking right, this scmuch cant even afford a postage stamp let alone an attorney.
Casey is so poor he cant even afford the last two letters..he's just Po.
Casey is so poor, he stepped on a cigarette butt and galina said who put out the heat.
casey is so poor, should his autobiography ever be written, it will start with chapter 7, then 9, then 11.
I give a shit about his site, and that's one more person than gives a shit about you.
"Honest Rob doesn't mind. This whole site is ripped off content from Casey. A blog about a blog. Dolph's site is even worse..."
I've been thru this before..what's even worse is someone leaving comments on a blog about a blog.
Now who are you really? Casey, Nigel, Rich Dad's son? Or are you really just some random shithead?
Ah who cares...
Anon said
"Besides Dolph, nobody but the twelve people that visit your site give two shits about your blog about a blog. How original"
Umm apparently anon you have been there.so that would make it thirteen, and it piqued your interest enough to have a look see, so obviously you gave a shit about a blog about a blog
I suggest you stop hyperventilating, wipe the spittle from your mouth, change your underwearm, and let the anti psychotics take effect before you post again kay?
"I've been thru this before..what's even worse is someone leaving comments on a blog about a blog."
Like you micro nads?
What do my balls have to do with anything?
Didn't I tell you to let the meds take effect?:-0)
I forgot, your wife must have told you how much she likes feeling them slap her chin...sorry bout that, you are correct sir to have brough them up.
I found out why Casey is infatuated with blue balls. his marbles got knocked out.
http://www.break.com/index/big_blue_ball.html
Go easy on the poor sap. he's obviously suffering from PTSD therefore all his errs should be written off ;)
"Sorry, it's the way of the world."
No it isn't. You're confused.
Let's say you want to create a blog to comment on Casey Serin's activities.
You say to yourself, "Hey! I want to use his likeness! Fair use is mine sayeth the courts!"
Maybe. Maybe not. That would be the subject for a libel suit.
But where are you going to get that likeness? Well, if you create it yourself, that's no problem. It's your image to use as you see fit.
But if I take a picture of Casey, no you are not allowed to publish it unless you get permission.
Realistically, I probably won't find out about it, nor even care. But that doesn't mean you're not stealing from the artist.
legion - I'm not married you dipshit. That must have been some sheep you were screwing. I'll bet that ewe wasn't very satisfied with your micro nads and micro prick.
Fitting that a huge prick has micro equipment.
Kids, the playground is at imfacingforeclosure not here. There is no offical playground monitor and that isn't a good thing for the children who misbehave as it would really piss off the adults who are enjoying the sunshine and freedom of this little corner of the blogosphere.
Wow Casey. I could care less about your mock attempts to silence me with a simple (C) notice.
He never registered the copyright and therefore it's not applicable to FAIR USE rules.
I suggest you look up FAIR USE. I have a FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT to post your comments and talk about them.
12 viewers, eh? Last time I checked Sitemeter, I'd beg to differ with you on UNIQUE visits. Try 100s of visitors, possibly more.
Whenever somebody attacks my point of view like you are it makes me wonder if I've really hit the target. Keep criticizing me, it's your God given right to. I welcome it.
Unlike you, Casey or whoever you are, I won't stop posting my POV. I am allowed to do it.
Sheesh, if you can get away with Mortgage fraud, I can surely get away with a few excerpts from your site.
Thanks for giving me some attention. I am sure that'll be good for a few hundred more visits. I aim to make my readers happy!
DO you really think Brittney gave her permission to take and publish the photograph proving she didn;t wera any underpants?
DO you think the photogragher got paid? You bet!
Do you think the photographer got sued? Hell no.
Embarassing? Yup.
Good job rob dogg bragging about how much money you have. It may be worthwhile for somebody to sue your ass for copyright infringement and libel...
Dolph, blow me. Wait as second. Hold that thought. I wouldn't let you come near me. I wouldn't even let you blow me with legion's microdick.
Hey Casey...I can use your image because YOU are a public figure and as such you are less likely to prove this in court.
BTW, a copyright is worthless if you didn't register it with the government.
Want the photos removed? Feel free to post a message in your comments section asking me to do this and I will be glad to revise my postings and remove any FLICKR photos at your request. Nobody can ever accuse me of not being a reasonable fellow. I will not cease the commentary, though.
Anything found in the public domain is a different story and I will not pull that stuff.
Fair deal?
Sorry Anon/Casey lover...I don't like men in that way. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Insults don't work with me, bud. Unlike your hero, I don't worry about such high school feelings of self doubt and loathing.
Aoin @ 5:54, you do realize that alltel and Arkansas both have very strict usage law concerning your posts? Yeah, they do. Not to worry, everyone knows you will say you don't care no matter whether you care or not. Don't bother.
Look, I don't care. Let me repeat. I don't care. You need to take your act where it will get an audience.
Amazing what happens when a jerk walks into a gun club waving a knife.
Uncle Rob, Legion and Dolph - time to boycott!! Every time someone responds to Casey's boyfriend it's just egging him on. We are THE HATERS, dammit! No one will stop us!
Re: Anon
This guy sounds like one of Casey's Pseudo-Guru, MLM, Network Of Scammer buddies that continues to post positive comments @ IAFF. Keep it up and we might take an interest your illteachyoutoberichlikeme blog, :)
I think the presure is getting to much for Casey to bear. Perhaps his lack of getting anything from G is starting to take it's toll. It seems to me people who talk like they have some big stuff usually means they are not getting anything.
Or it could just be one of Casey's supporters.
Oh poor Casey. Never has that been more appropriate.
Married less than 5 years, that Valantine gift best be something special. Then again how to pay for it?
A sysmptom of dression is sleeping. No way would a fit adult need to take naps.
The end is near, how long can he not be that homeless fellow? Of course we can listen to him and his hopes (delusions) of upcomming sweet deals. But never once has there been a realistic plan to get out of this mess except for buying a shell copr, getting more debt, and buying an aprtment building to be run by someone else.
The one consistency going on here -- This guy simply does not want to work!
ANyone who can stand up for this lazy worthless person must be blind or perhaps a family mmember?
Could it be G talking tough? Ummm....
Wouldn't it be interesting if Casey's dad or brothers are posting here - might explain the animosity.
Sorry Anon, I was busy getting laid and counting the $24,280 I made in the stock market this week.
Arkansas eh? lol
Ok, enough wtih Anon, Mel is right. No more response from me. You are now a ghost anon.
Woot a new Casey entry:
I got the following email from an investor via my Realtor on the Rio Rancho property:
Subject: Redemption
*** Realty will give $250 in good faith to Casey Serin for his assignment of statutory rights of redemption. When *** Realty successfully redeems the property at 6021 Guadalajara an additional $1250 will be given to Mr. Serin.
I talked to the investor today. He said in New Mexico the owner has the right to redeem the property up to 30 days from the foreclosure auction if the owner can come up with the cash to pay back all the lenders and fees. Well, most owners in foreclosure are not going to be able to come up with that cash so this guy is offering to buy my redemption right and be able to redeem my property.
I’m not familiar with redemption rights because here in California we don’t have that kind of a thing. So this is new to me.
As far as the short sale, we haven’t had any offers come through yet (even after lowering the price to 469) so I don’t know if the short sale thing is going to happen and the auction is coming up fast.
Here is the foreclosure sale notice letter that I found in my mail the other day:
If you remember I was also thinking of doing some kind of a raffle to sell this house an others but it doesn’t like it’s going to happen. I didn’t get that good of a response and I don’t have the marketing budget to sell enough raffle tickets. There are also legal issues involved because I would have to run it through a non-profit organization or do an essay contest of some kind. I’ll just have to file that under “maybe some other time”.
So at this point I have a good chance of losing the Rio Rancho property to foreclosure come Valentine’s day.
What do I have to lose by taking $1500 for my redemption rights?
------------
Who would pay an extra $1500 for a property up and beyond he cash back deal Casey made?
And why wait till after the forclosure?
Something just doesn;t add up.
Of course casey only displays the forclosure notice and not this offer.
Something is just not right.
Of course our hero will sign anything. It seems like a free $1500! Woot sweet deals!
Anybody seen Jerkovsky's latest troll? Some investor has offer to buy Sh@tferbrain's redemption rights on one of his properties...and Trump-face appears to not even know what redemption rights are.
There's a blazing $1,500 in it for J-off if he does the "right" thing.
Pretty soon it's going to be trading "favors" for contraband prison cigarettes. Sweeeeet....
ctually I can see a reason for this. If for some reason the guy who really wants the property for some reason; for instance in owns the land next to it, and he loses the auction for $250 he bought another way to get the property.
Of course our hero only sees the $1500, not the fact this guy will be one of the bidders and he really is only paying $250 for a last ditch effort to get the property which chances are is not going to happen.
Now if I was this guy makign this offer, I would be a miffed right now that the offer is now in the public domain.
Oh well, Casey should take the $250 and buy G a Valantines gift. The masacre is just beginning!
@Dolph -
was just reading the silly posts above. Take the high road & ignore the prattlings of that poster who probably gets all his social contact through myspace.
Idjit, I don't censor or edit, I sweep up poop.
I suspect the Anon twerp is Galina or someone associated with her who may or may not be Casey (but this looser read too bitchy to be him). If Dolph’s site isn’t being visited why care about http://caseylandusa.blogspot.com/2007/02/galina-inspector-guardian-of-caseys.html.
Where did those photos go btw?
I just heard on my police scanner the Sacramento police have picked up one Casey Serin.
Enjoy!
Rob - maybe you can explain this to me. Anything over 80% LTV requires PMI. But yet it is only allowed on homes that are the primary dwelling. Who protects the lender in situations such as Basketcasey's when he lied on the loan application? I would think that he is required to pay the PMI because he stated that each and every house would be his primary home but when the truth comes out will that insurance be declared null and void? And who will make that call?
Wow, Friday night and people with little maturity or self control in their financial lives begin to drink and completely lose control of their senses and start to sound more like idiots and losers than they usually do. I sense a complete case of crazy coming on and maybe a total mental breakdown for someone.
Mel
There is no PMI on these houses. They are 80/20 loans. These lenders are totally unprotected. Am I right, Robb Dawg?
Ouch!! Heidi - I think you are right. I got caught up thinking about the no money down (plus trying to change the subject) instead of LTV.
Okay, here's the scoop. Traditionaly anything less than 80% LTV required PMI. What happened was wierd, the other 20% as a second at a higher interest rate was presumed to protect the first. Don't ask me why but that's what happened.
What would robert do?
He'd delete every post he didn't like.
Hypocrite!
OK 7:06 Anon, I'll bite -
When and where did the police pick our hero up?
To me the redemption offer sounds like the builder/realty company is basically paying Casey off. "Please take our $1500 and don't cause us any other problems during the redemption period". Kind of like paying a bad tenant to leave.
Why do people always resort to threatening libel suits and whatnot on teh intertubes?
It's a silly idle threat. It's almost impossible to win a libel suit in the US when you have already deliberately made a public spectacle of yourself.
Stoopid interweb lawyers. More high level approach please, damnit.
re:
>>You character assasinate anyone you want. When the tables are turned, you delete.<<
Certain people deserve no more consideration than that. Even in venues that normally do not eliminate posts, it is okay to do away with the posts of the Serin gypsy clan. Being subhuman, they are fit for no better treatment.
After reading Casey's latest entry, I think I give up.
Why is it this "person" can get away with this kind of crap and honest hard working people never get a fair shake?
Argh...I'm feeling a bit tired. I may go back to being a hater here and cease the blog. Too much to do and too little time to do it.
:(
"Okay, here's the scoop. Traditionaly anything less than 80% LTV required PMI. What happened was wierd, the other 20% as a second at a higher interest rate was presumed to protect the first. Don't ask me why but that's what happened."
More accurately, PMI was always designed to protect only the part of the mortgage that was considered the most risky. Some say above 80%, but more prudently 65-70%.
Remember, PMI pays off a lender's loss, not the whole value of the loan.
Or think of it this way, even with holding costs, if a bank can't sell a house for 65% of the loan amount, better pack it in. The world will melt down. And there ain't no insurance for that.
No, I'm not the "anon" misbehaving, I'm just someone who knows a little about copyright, as a published artist. I'm also channeling Tim from M tonight...
A few points to ponder:
dolph, just dolph said...
"Hey Casey...I can use your image because YOU are a public figure and as such you are less likely to prove this in court."
Yes, if YOU take the picture - this is the crux of the issue. You did not take the picture, L'il Casey did, he owned it the minute he pushed the shutter button. Period, end of story. You have zero rights to these pictures unless he assigns them to you, no judge would allow that kind of precedent to be set in copyright law.
However:
If you run into the Blintz Brain at Safeway in the parking lot, pull out your camera, and take a picture, you can do with it as you wish. You can even take pictures of him sunbathing in his backyard, if that floats your boat, papparatzi do it all the time, as technically a backyard is a "public place" where it can be reasonably assumed he could be seen. Thus, nude shots of celebs on beaches, but none of them through the bathroom window coming out of the shower.
He cannot sue you for copyright infringement, as you cannot copyright your own image, and by taking the picture with your equipment, it's your copyright. Trust me, celebs would sue over copyrights, if they could. (You can't patent yourself either, and I think trademarking your own image is also not possible.)
The only thing you have in your favor is you are not charging for copies of the work, or seeking any profit from access to the pictures (maybe...if you make money from page hits...), but technically he CAN sue you for reproducing his pictures without his permission. You might have a case of editorial/sartorical use (and that's limited to excerpts), but I'd ask a lawyer first.
Granted, copyright lawyers are VERY expensive, and there's no damages to go after in this case, but I would not be so sure of your position here. I would talk with a lawyer before claiming the rights you do, the DCMA changes the rules, and I don't think they favor your position.
Plus, i'd really, really hate to see that little fuckwad prevail against you. Ya know?
The text of his site...that's another story, and "fair use" and copyright law gives you very limited use of that material without permission.
You're treading a very dangerous slope claiming "fair use". Read up on the actual law and what it covers at:
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
"Fair use" is a fairly loose term, and the scope of what can be considered "fair use" is limited - many people have been burned here. According to the actual law, you can "excerpt", not republish in whole. Intent also comes into play here, and it's very muddy waters.
A good example of "fair use", in the context of photography, is here:
http://www.danheller.com/model-release.html#8.1
Even the copyright site says ask a lawyer if you're covered.
Again, hate to see the little cretin win against you. Tread carefully when claiming "fair use".
dolph, just dolph said... "BTW, a copyright is worthless if you didn't register it with the government."
No. Flat out wrong. Please research this before you make any more claims like this. That is a very dangerous thing to claim, and can get you in some serious trouble if you think it's true, and act accordingly:
From http://www.copyright.gov/:
When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
I've personally sued for copyright infringment for works unregistered with the copyright office. It's simply not rquired. The law favors the artist/creator here.
As for the Brittney example, no, sorry, wrong. Brittany cannot sue for the shot of her vag because she is a public person, in a public place, and they were not reproducing nor selling an image she took, created, or owned, and she does not own any copyright, patent, or trademark on her face, body, or vag.
I'm on your side, Dolph, i don't want to see you judged against by the little creep, but copyrights and the laws pertaining to them matter very much to me, and you're claiming rights you do not have.
It's fun to poke fun at him, and I cannot be sued for saying 'in my opinion Casey Serin is a liar who defrauded several banks buying houses", but when you start claiming rights to his pictures and text - as lame and purile as it is - you are going into very, very dangerous territory. The First Amendment does NOT give you free rights to impinge and abuse the copyrights of others, thank god, it just gives you the right to comment on what he writes about and takes pictures of - and reuse in very specific and certain terms.
Now, to torpedo myself, Puddin' Brain links his photos from Flickr, and his account is set so people can download them - this may or may not be something he's even thought about, or cares about - and if he's reading here he may change the access controls to his pictures now. No matter, he still retains all rights to his images, and I see nothing posted by him releasing or assigning the rights to anyone else.
He assigns a © to his blog, which any reasonable person would assumes covers ALL content, pictures and text. So his access controls on Flickr disagrees with his copyright on his blog...such a state may give you leverage, but again, I'd ask an attorney first. He can change the access of the photos on Flickr tomorrow and start sending out C&Ds, he still owns the copyright regardless.
It's confusing enough that I would seriously talk to a lawyer before I started claiming any rights here. Be careful Dolph. Don't give him any ability to waste your time or harrass you, or god forbid, win a judgement against you.
I guess it's moot now, the site is now gone.
There was no libel as my comments were critiques of his public ones.
I made zero $$$ on the site per your comment.
Therefore, no harm no foul. Site is down, no more Dolph to deal with.
He also is signed on to Creative Commons. It means he has designated his photos SOME rights reserved. Since the picures linked back to his site it is part of his license. If he didn't want bloggers using his photos, he should change the settings (easy in Flickr).
I get where you are going but it's no longer anybody's concern. Again, I closed it...no harm no foul. If he's upset or something, I have posted that if he wanted anything removed, I would have obliged.
So it's over now. If I was misinformed in my opinions, then I apologize.
How on earth do the Somethingawful.com and fark.com forums survive without being brought down by litigation? The photoshopped images on those sites almost exclusively violate the copyrights of huge corporate properties.
I don't think Casey will pose a serious legal threat to those bloggers who borrow his wimpy, ineffectual photos, no matter what his rights are under copyright law.
@anon I'm just someone who knows a little about copyright
there is a journalism exception to copyright law.
blogging is journalism, bloggers are journalists per recent court decision.
this blog is exempt from copyright infringement.
go back to school.
Has blogging been defined as journalism by the courts? I havent seen that it is - so your exemption is theoretical until put before a judge.
And I've been to school, thanks. Is that all you've got?
Dolph - gotcha. Site's gone, no worries. Just trying to warn ya, so you did'nt give the creep any leverage.
So does this exemption mean that journalists can copy, paste and republish anything they like, in any quantity?
I'm guessing not.
In fact, I'm pretty damn certain that that isn't what it means, otherwise every publication in the country would be ripping each other off wholesale - why not, if there's no legal payback?
Post a Comment